Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. SAMUEL ALGARME Y BONDA

This case has been cited 10 times or more.

	GR No. 174471 2016-01-12	PEOPLE v. JERRY PEPINO Y RUERAS BRION, J.
As the Court ruled in People v. Algarme:[51]
	GR No. 174471 2016-01-12	PEOPLE v. JERRY PEPINO Y RUERAS BRION, J.
In evaluating suggestiveness of the out-of-court identification, this court considers prior or contemporaneous[75] actions of law enforcers, prosecutors, media, or even fellow witnesses.
	GR No. 195244 2015-06-22	PEOPLE v. ALVIN ESUGON Y AVILA BERSAMIN, J.
To sustain a conviction for robbery with homicide, the Prosecution must prove the concurrence of the following elements, namely: (1) the taking of personal property belonging to another; (2) with intent to gain; (3) with the use of violence or intimidation against a person; and (4) the crime of homicide, as used in the generic sense, was committed on the occasion or by reason of the robbery.[22] A conviction requires certitude that the robbery is the main objective of the malefactor, and the killing is merely incidental to the robbery.[23]
	GR No. 208170 2014-08-20	PEOPLE v. PETRUS YAU MENDOZA, J.
It has been an established rule in appellate review that the trial court's factual findings, such as its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses, the probative weight of their testimonies, and the conclusions drawn from the factual findings, are accorded great respect and have even conclusive effect. Such factual findings and conclusions assume even greater weight when they are affirmed by the CA.[17]
	GR No. 198022 2014-04-07	PEOPLE v. SONNY GATARIN Y CABALLERO PERALTA, J.
The trial court's factual findings, including its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses, the probative weight of their testimonies, and the conclusions drawn from the factual findings are accorded great respect and even conclusive effect. We, nevertheless, fully scrutinize the records, since the penalty of reclusion perpetua that the CA imposed on appellant demands no less than this kind of careful and deliberate consideration.[19]
	GR No. 191752 2013-06-10	PEOPLE v. JOSE ARMANDO CERVANTES CACHUELA BRION, J.
"A special complex crime of robbery with homicide takes place when a homicide is committed either by reason, or on the occasion, of the robbery. To sustain a conviction for robbery with homicide, the prosecution must prove the following elements: (1) the taking of personal property belonging to another; (2) with intent to gain; (3) with the use of violence or intimidation against a person; and (4) on the occasion or by reason of the robbery, the crime of homicide, as used in its generic sense, was committed. A conviction requires certitude that the robbery is the main purpose, and objective of the malefactor and the killing is merely incidental to the robbery. The intent to rob must precede the taking of human life but the killing may occur before, during or after the robbery."[16]
	GR No. 201449 2013-04-03	PEOPLE v. WELVIN DIU Y KOTSESA LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Thus, it has been an established rule in appellate review that the trial court's factual findings including its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses, the probative weight of their testimonies, and the conclusions drawn from the factual findings are accorded great respect and even conclusive effect. These factual findings and conclusions assume greater weight if they are affirmed by the Court of Appeals.[42]
	GR No. 175315 2010-08-09	PEOPLE v. ELIZER BEDUYA DEL CASTILLO, J.
When death results as a consequence of the crime, the heirs of the deceased are entitled to the amount of P50,000.00 as indemnity for the death of the victim without need of any evidence or proof of damages.[39] Accordingly, we award said sum to the heirs of the victim, Acope, Sr.
	GR No. 170472 2009-07-03	PEOPLE v. JOJO MUSA Y SANTOS BRION, J.
An established rule in appellate review is that the trial court's factual findings - including its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses, the probative weight of their testimonies, and the conclusions drawn from the factual findings - are accorded great respect and even conclusive effect if duly supported by evidence. These factual findings and conclusions assume greater weight if they are affirmed by the CA. This jurisprudential rule notwithstanding, we fully scrutinized the records of this case; the penalty of reclusion perpetua that the CA imposed on the appellants demands no less than this kind of careful consideration.[26]